NFHS courtsey runner intepretation

[asdf]

And still no mention of this interpretation on your state's website.

I'm curious why the most recent interpretation bulletin (produced before this bulletin) covers such popular and confusing topics as "playing the game", what a batter may do on a "pitch delivered", "strike", and "batter becomes a runner"...........

......yet they make no mention of an interpretation direct from the FED that is 100% contrary to common sense and the rule, and further tell you that there will be no discussion about the matter......

This just doesn't pass the smell test.

[PABlue]

Well one problem is with fighting this is the last sentence in the email that was sent out from the PIAA Rules Interpreter. " ,as State Interpreter I now consider this matter "case closed".
I don't know about anyone else but when you are told something is done being discussed it's hard to move past that. It's almost like telling a coach that a discussion about a judgment call is over. If he continues to argue he's probably going to be ejected and I could see PA umpires maybe not being ejected but severely sanctioned if they continue to argue with the state rule interpreter over something the NATIONAL rules interpreter has ruled on.

On a side note I to find some of our bulletins that are put out to be very remedial but sometimes I think they run out of things to say so they go back to the very basics of the game.

[johnnyg08]

I think the question was either asked incorrectly or interpreted incorrectly. The courtesy runner isn't even a substitute by rule.

[asdf]

Originally Posted by PABlue

Well one problem is with fighting this is the last sentence in the email that was sent out from the PIAA Rules Interpreter. ", as State Interpreter I now consider this matter "case closed".

The interpreter sends out an email.
The email addresses an "issue" that has never been brought forth.
The interpreter invites no discussion or reasoning and declares the matter "case closed".

The interpreter is an idiot.

I'm with johnnyg on this. Something is amiss in that original scenario presented or the interpretation presented. I've spoken with interpreters in six states and their responses have been.... "say what"??